@justatest90-0 said in Austin Wolf discussion not allowed?:
@ianfontinell-0 said in Austin Wolf discussion not allowed?:
This is the best place (only place tbh) to discuss that....instead of just waiting to remove off-topic comments the moderation could use the comment section to make a brief statement,
Or people can have the discussion in the only appropriate place for the discussion. Some comments make sense: "RIP Blake Mitchell" makes sense on content he's in for hopefully obvious reasons.
It's even feasible to make commentary on performers. I think a comment here is what alerted me to Johnny Rapid's behavior. But it was just a comment about the performer, and personally I think that's helpful information for deciding whether I want to download the file.
But a debate about whether such content should be allowed obviously doesn't belong on the content page itself.
Just weighing in here - remember though: my thoughts are worth only what you paid for them!
First off, THIS is the "forum" for discussion - comments sections of torrents is NOT a valid place to have a discussion.
IMHO, posting something like "RIP Blake Mitchell" on one (or all) of his vids is not the same as requesting that content should be removed. It imparts reasonable knowledge about one of the stars.
Along those lines, if you wanted to post in Austin Wolf torrents that he is now a convicted sex offender, I'm OK with that! (remember, that's MY opinion, not the site's!) Its when you go that next step and say "... AND this should be banned" that I object. The first part is informing about the video and its stars... the other is an attempt to censor content... and likely, those comments (requesting removal) should be removed. But not because they may or may not be valid, but rather that a torrent's comment section isn't the place for that!
Corollary: When a priest is convicted of molesting an alter-boy, is the entire congregation supposed to drop the Catholic Faith in response? Were his sermons LESS valuable because of his crimes? If you're Catholic, were his absolutions in the confessional rescinded because he sinned? If so, were they rescinded when he committed his crimes, or only after his conviction?
Another case to consider: Brent Corrigan admitted to doing porn under-age (the level of involvement in all parties in that debacle is a debate for another time), yet he remained in the business - albeit as an adult - afterwards. IMHO, it is valid that we ban his illegal content: that is, videos that include Brent while he was under-age. But do we also ban all of his other content?
I despise SCAT porn, and generally am not a fan of FTM tranny porn. Some S&M porn gets REALLY violent - possibly illegally so, should the performer/victim want to press charges (in spite of forms signed prior to taping). Should any of these be banned? It's a slippery slope! What's more, who becomes the decider? (I'm assuming George W Bush isn't willing to perform that role!)
IMHO: when the content itself is illegal, it should be banned. If the content legal, but objectionable to some users - but is otherwise within the rules of the site, it should stay - so long as there are people seeding and downloading it, it apparently belongs here.
Again, these are my opinions - as a user here for approaching 20 years now - and if you object to them, I'll give you a 100% refund! 
I'm back down to 25TB in use...
).